ULAW 1000 - Understanding Judicial Decisions, Legal Reasoning

January 27 - Understanding Judicial Decisions, Legal Reasoning

• Process of Common Law Development 

  • Judges are not voted in and neither are lawyers 

    • It takes away from our well-known democratic process 

  • How do we figure out what the law is? 

  • A lot of the law is worded in judicial decisions 

  • Because courts constantly reference prior cases and are bound in many instances to follow prior decisions, a tradition can sometimes seem to be a reason for a decision. 

  • Common law gives way more power to judges than civil law 

    • Judges are not elected 

    • Unusual feature 

• Legal System Essentials 

  • Institutions 

    • Courts 

      • Apply a standard to whether a law needs something to be reconsidered

      • How unfair would it be to make parties subject to a certain dispute 

    • Legislatures 

    • Regulatory Agencies 

  • Court Structure 

    • Federal and state 

    • Trial and appeal 

      • The first step in the litigation process is to get to a trial and win 

      • Most cases tend to settle 

      • Trial courts are structured to hold trails 

        • One judge, judge can panel a jury, judges have experience and expertise in conducting trials and pre-trial stuff that lawyers on both sides do when there is a given dispute 

      • Courts of Appeal

        • Go next when one does not like what occurred from the trial or the pre-trial process 

        • Review and sometimes overturn or revise the decisions of trial courts 

        • Are multiple levels of appeal 

    • Courts of “last resort” 

      • Supreme Court 

      • Review and overturn/revise the decisions of the Intermediate Court of Appeals 

      • The process needs to end at some point; the process ends then 

    • The U.S. Supreme Court 

      • Final say on all issues in federal law 

      • Constitutional issues 

• Who decides at trial? 

  • The judge will decide questions of law and may decide questions of fact 

  • The jury may decide on questions of fact 

• Who decides on the appeal 

  • Usually a panel of three judges  

    • Supreme Court is usually all 9 if they are all in office 

• Trial Courts 

  • Burdens of Proof 

    • Dictate what litigation will be like 

    • Fees, travel expenses, etc 

  • Insufficient Evidence 

    • The preponderance of the evidence 

      • Have to persuade the jury that it is more likely than not that one should get the money that they are asking for 

      • Need to nudge them past a 50/50 split on how they should come down 

        • Requires less evidence and less persuasion 

    • Clear and convincing evidence 

      • This only applies to certain cases 

      • Needs to be somewhat better than preponderance but easier than reasonable count 

    • Beyond a reasonable count 

      • Almost 100% to convince and persuade 

• Courts of Appeal 

  • How much deference will the appellate court give to the ruling of the lower court? 

    • Questions of Law 

      • De novo review 

        • Start from scratch to review the case

    • Questions of Fact 

      • Reverse only if erroneous 

        • Not built to take evidence 

    • Application of law to facts 

      • Reverse only if erroneous 

    • Committed to discretion 

      • Reverse if the lower court abused its discretion 

      • Will only get overturned if it abuses its discretion 

  • Courts of Appeal do not take new evidence 

  • Just take what was given to them 

  • Do not like overturning factual findings 

    • Will only overturn it because it is clear 

• How many rulings will be reversed under each standard of review? 

  • De novo

    • Not much, just taking some 

    • Most common 

  • Erroneous

    • New evidence 

• The Federal Judiciary 

  • US Constitution, Article III: “The Judicial Power of the US, shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish 

  • US Constitution, Article III: “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, st states Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office” 

  • Article II: “The President… shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint… Judges of the Supreme Court 

  • In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction, in all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make 

  • 1457 “sitting” federal judges (sitting = currently in office) 

  • Approx. 4022 federal judges have served since the Constitution was adopted (1789) 

  • 15 impeached: 8 convicted, 4 acquitted, 3 resigned before Senate trial 

    • House has to impeach you or indicted 

    • Subject to trial in the Senate 

  • The Supreme Court of each state is the last resort and nobody can overturn that law 

  • Madisonian Compromise 

• Precedent: Is it binding?

  • Binding precedent (controlling authority) 

    • The court has no choice but to follow 

    • From higher courts in the chain of authority 

    • From the current court in the past, however… 

  • Persuasive Authority 

    • The court has a choice whether to follow 

    • From a lower court in the chain of authority or a court on another chain 

• Reading Like a Lawyer

  • Examine the context 

  • Extract the legal principles 

  • Evaluate the Reasoning 

• Reading Cases 

  • Why are we reading it? 

    • What is the purpose 

    • What should we be learning 

  • Brief It 

  • Hawkins v. Mcgee

    • Facts 

      • D (Defendant) persuaded P (Plaintiff) to have a skin graft to repair scars on P’s palm by promising P a “100% perfect hand”

      • P suffered pain and developed a hairy palm 

    • Procedural posture 

      • Look up unfamiliar terms 

      • Assumpsit 

        • An express or implied promise or contract whose breach entitles the non-breaching party to compensation 

        • A civil lawsuit brought to blame that compensation 

    • Rule 

    • Reasoning 

Understanding Judicial Decisions and Legal Reasoning

Process of Common Law Development

• Judges are appointed rather than elected, which diverges from the traditional democratic process.

• The interpretation and application of law often stem from judicial decisions rather than legislatively enacted statutes.

• The principle of precedent plays a significant role; courts frequently reference previous cases and are often bound by earlier decisions, leading to a law that can evolve through established traditions.

• Unlike civil law systems, where legislation is primary, common law systems confer substantial authority to judges, allowing them to influence the law through case rulings.

Legal System Essentials

• Key Institutions:

  • Courts: Essential in applying legal standards and reassessing laws as necessary.

  • Legislatures: Bodies responsible for creating laws.

  • Regulatory Agencies: Organizations that enforce specific laws and regulations.

• Court Structure:

  • Divided into federal and state systems, which encompass trial and appellate courts.

  • The litigation process begins with trial courts where cases are presented, followed by potential appeals if outcomes are contested.

  • Trial courts typically consist of a single judge and may include a jury, providing a specialized environment for dispute resolution.

• Courts of Appeal: When a party is dissatisfied with a trial court ruling, they can appeal to an intermediate court, which functions to review and potentially overturn or revise trial court decisions.

  • There are multiple levels of appeals culminating in the Supreme Court, which serves as the court of last resort for federal legal issues, including constitutional matters.

Roles within the Court System

• Trial Court Decisions:

  • The judge determines questions of law and facts, while the jury typically decides factual disputes.

• Appeal Decisions:

  • Appeals are often resolved by a panel of three judges in appellate courts, and by all nine justices in the Supreme Court, when in session.

Evidence Standards and Rulings

• Burdens of Proof:

  • Legal proceedings are guided by three primary standards:

    • Preponderance of the Evidence: The party must prove their case is more likely true than not, surpassing a 50% probability threshold.

    • Clear and Convincing Evidence: A higher standard than preponderance, generally required in specific civil cases.

    • Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: The highest burden of proof, primarily applied in criminal cases, requires near certainty of guilt.

• Discretion of Appeals:

  • Appellate courts do not introduce new evidence; they review the case based on the record from the trial court, focusing on whether errors were made in the legal process or in applying the law to the evidence presented.

  • A court's ruling is often only reversed if clear errors are demonstrated or if there was an abuse of discretion by the lower court.

The Federal Judiciary

• Constitutional Foundations:

  • The judicial power of the United States is outlined in Article III of the U.S. Constitution, emphasizing the establishment of a Supreme Court and any inferior courts deemed necessary by Congress.

• Judicial Appointments:

  • Judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, ensuring a system of checks and balances in judicial appointments.

• Historical Context: Since the adoption of the Constitution in 1789, approximately 4,022 federal judges have served, with 1,457 actively holding their positions today.

  • Judicial accountability measures exist, including impeachment processes initiated by the House and trials conducted in the Senate.

Precedential Value in Legal Cases

• Binding Precedent: Refers to rulings from higher courts that lower courts are obligated to follow, establishing a cohesive legal framework.

• Persuasive Authority: Involves decisions from lower courts or courts outside the immediate hierarchy that may influence but are not obligatory for a court to follow.

Legal Reading and Case Analysis

• Purpose of Legal Reading: Critical examination of legal texts involves identifying context, extracting principles, and evaluating reasoning inherent in judicial opinions.

• Case Briefing:

  • For instance, in Hawkins v. McGee:

    • Facts: Defendant convinced the plaintiff to undergo a skin graft with promises of a “100% perfect hand,” which resulted in complications for the plaintiff.

    • Procedural Posture: Understanding the flow of the case through the legal system, including terminology such as ‘assumpsit,’ which relates to promises and contracts.